3 ms·
Why would it be better to own stock in a company subject to the control of ever-changing third parties whose goals and motivations I cannot know? At least if I
by nknighthb 13y ago
Why would it be better to own stock in a company subject to the control of ever-changing third parties whose goals and motivations I cannot know?
At least if I bought Google stock (which I never have directly), I'd know my investment would be shepherded by three specific individuals whose characteristics and motivations are at least not entirely mysterious, nor entirely in conflict with my own, until they decide it is appropriate for that control to change.
- solomatov 13y ago>Why would it be better to own stock in a company subject to the control of ever-changing third parties whose goals and motivations I cannot know? Actually motivation of the board of a typical is well known: to get as much money as possible. Most of public companies are owned by institutional investor, i.e. mutual, pension, hedge, etc funds.
- nknighthb 13y agoI'm talking about the shareholders who choose the board, not the board itself. Institutional investors change their holdings all the time. And many of them are controlled by people I believe should never see the outside of a prison. (And even the ones that aren't, might be tomorrow!) So again, I ask, why is it better to risk my money in investments this ever-changing cast of characters can control, rather than companies like Google?
- yohui 13y ago> until they decide it is appropriate for that control to change Or, perish the thought, they die* (wills aside). * Though see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calico_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calico_(company)